Content deleted Content added
→References: dead link to Stuart Hall's article from University of Birmingham. It's still accessible via the wayback machine, but unsure on if it would be approppriate to link to the wayback machine |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Short description|Cultural studies model}}
The '''encoding/decoding model of communication''' emerged in rough and general form in 1948 in [[Claude E. Shannon]]'s "A Mathematical Theory of Communication," where it was part of a technical schema for designating the technological encoding of signals. Gradually, it was adapted by communications scholars, most notably [[Wilbur Schramm]], in the 1950s, primarily to explain how mass communications could be effectively transmitted to a public, its meanings intact by the audience (i.e., decoders).<ref name="How communication works">{{cite book|first=Schramm|last=Wilbur|title=The process and effects of mass communication|publisher=[[University of Illinois Press]]|___location=Urbana, Illinois|date=1954}}</ref> As the jargon of Shannon's information theory moved into semiotics, notably through the work of thinkers [[Roman Jakobson]], [[Roland Barthes]], and [[Umberto Eco]], who in the course of the 1960s began to put more emphasis on the social and political aspects of encoding.<ref name="Code">{{cite book|first=Bernard|last=Geoghegan|title=Code: From Information Theory to French Theory|publisher=[[Duke University Press]]|___location=Durhan, North Carolina|date=2024}}</ref> It became much more widely known, and popularised, when adapted by cultural studies scholar [[Stuart Hall (cultural theorist)|Stuart Hall]] in 1973, for a conference addressing mass communications scholars. In a Marxist twist on this model, Stuart Hall's study, titled the study 'Encoding and Decoding in the Television Discourse.' offered a theoretical approach of how media messages are produced, disseminated, and interpreted.<ref name="Encoding and Decoding">{{cite web |last1=Hall |first1=Stuart |title=Encoding and Decoding in the Television Discourse |url=https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-artslaw/history/cccs/stencilled-occasional-papers/1to8and11to24and38to48/SOP07.pdf |
Thus, encoding/decoding is the translation needed for a message to be easily understood. When you decode a message, you extract the meaning of that message in ways to simplify it. Decoding has both verbal and non-verbal forms of communication: Decoding behavior without using words, such as displays of non-verbal communication. There are many examples, including observing body language and its associated emotions, e.g. monitoring signs when someone is upset, angry, or stressed where they use excessive hand/arm movements, crying, and even silence. Moreover, there are times when an individual can send a message across to someone, the message can be interpreted differently from person to person. Decoding is all about understanding others, based on the information given throughout the message being received. Whether there is a large audience or exchanging a message to one person, decoding is the process of obtaining, absorbing and sometimes utilizing information that was given throughout a verbal or non-verbal message.
Line 51:
Hall explains this when he states "decoding within the negotiated version contains a mixture of adaptive and oppositional elements: it acknowledges the legitimacy of the [[Cultural hegemony|hegemonic]] definitions to make the grand significations (abstract), while, at a more restricted, situational (situated) level, it makes its own ground rules- it operates with exceptions to the rule".<ref name="Encoding and Decoding" /> Basically, this means that people understand the dominant position, they generally believe the position, but they are in a situation where they must make up their own separate rules to coexist with the dominant position. Hall provides an example involving an Industrial Relations Bill. In his example, he shows how a factory worker may recognize and agree with the dominant position that a wage freeze is beneficial. However, while the worker may recognize that the wage freeze is needed, they may not be willing to partake in a wage freeze since it will directly affect them rather than others <ref name="Hall"/> His example demonstrates that people may negotiate a code to work around their own beliefs and self-interests. This code is very much based on context.
Once more, Castleberry demonstrates the negotiated code at play in a modern-day television show. In ''Breaking Bad'', protagonist [[Walter White (Breaking Bad)|Walter White]]'s wife [[
===Oppositional position===
| |||